|
|
Post by heather on Apr 4, 2011 4:07:30 GMT
|
|
dh7fb
New Member
Posts: 25
|
Post by dh7fb on Apr 5, 2011 10:07:56 GMT
Hi Dr. Leif, in response to the present hemispheric assymetricly solar acitivity I took a look at the hemispheric allocation of the sunspotarea in the past. I found the data for the total Sunspotarea here: solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/greenwch/sunspot_area.txt and also the data for NH and SH of the sun. I calculated a monthly Index similar to this paper: adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1993ApJ...403..797V :AreaNH-AreaSH/Area total *100, so I got the asymmetry in percent. This its the plot: www.dh7fb.de/ssnano/ssnns.gifIn the upper part (blue) is drawn the "asymmetric index" with a simple 5yr running mean. In red is drawn the total sunspotarea. To both curves I added a binomial fit (3rd order) and we see something interesting. During weak cycles (SC 12...SC14 untill 1914) we have a more or less southern hemispheric orientation of activity. During stronger cycles with the peak of SC19 in 1958 we see a exciting northward swing: www.dh7fb.de/ssnano/ssans19.gif (in red). The binomial fits of the total activity (ss-area) and of the hermispheric index are some kind of syncronic so could it be true to say: more activity means more northward orientation in longer scale? greetings DH7FB |
|
|
|
Post by vukcevic on Apr 5, 2011 13:30:28 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Apr 5, 2011 16:51:53 GMT
Hi Dr. Leif, in response to the present hemispheric assymetricly solar acitivity I took a look at the hemispheric allocation of the sunspotarea in the past. I found the data for the total Sunspotarea here: solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/greenwch/sunspot_area.txt and also the data for NH and SH of the sun. I calculated a monthly Index similar to this paper: adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1993ApJ...403..797V :AreaNH-AreaSH/Area total *100, so I got the asymmetry in percent. This its the plot: www.dh7fb.de/ssnano/ssnns.gifIn the upper part (blue) is drawn the "asymmetric index" with a simple 5yr running mean. In red is drawn the total sunspotarea. To both curves I added a binomial fit (3rd order) and we see something interesting. During weak cycles (SC 12...SC14 untill 1914) we have a more or less southern hemispheric orientation of activity. During stronger cycles with the peak of SC19 in 1958 we see a exciting northward swing: www.dh7fb.de/ssnano/ssans19.gif (in red). The binomial fits of the total activity (ss-area) and of the hermispheric index are some kind of syncronic so could it be true to say: more activity means more northward orientation in longer scale? greetings DH7FB People have looked at N-S asymmetries for a long time. No consistent and generally accepted pattern has been found. |
|
|
|
Post by Maui on Apr 5, 2011 17:20:36 GMT
Sir, am I out of line for criticizing Nandy et al., for their computer simulation which uses an 8.9-year solar cycle?* (See solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1588) In general, I believe this model is a gross over-simplification of the most complex part of our solar system. And to be on-topic, I might add that their model appears to include / produce no asymmetry. ___________________ *"The unusual minimum of sunspot cycle 23 caused by meridional plasma flow variations," Dibyendu Nandy, Andrés Muñoz-Jaramillo, & Petrus C. H. Martens; Nature 471, 80–82, 03 March 2011 |
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Apr 5, 2011 17:31:45 GMT
Sir, am I out of line for criticizing Nandy et al., for their computer simulation which uses an 8.9-year solar cycle?* (See solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1588) In general, I believe this model is a gross over-simplification of the most complex part of our solar system. And to be on-topic, I might add that their model appears to include / produce no asymmetry. ___________________ *"The unusual minimum of sunspot cycle 23 caused by meridional plasma flow variations," Dibyendu Nandy, Andrés Muñoz-Jaramillo, & Petrus C. H. Martens; Nature 471, 80–82, 03 March 2011 I'm also not so impressed by the Nandy paper. There is a discussion of it at WUWT: wattsupwiththat.com/2011/03/03/missing-sunspots-solved-by-nasa/ |
|
|
|
Post by Maui on Apr 5, 2011 17:40:04 GMT
Thank you for your reply.
Regarding asymmetry, I just waded through the "Supplementary Information" for about the fifth time, then found my answer in the text of the "Letter:" the meridional flow speed is varied "with the same amplitude in both hemispheres." ("The unusual minimum of sunspot cycle 23 caused by meridional plasma flow variations," Dibyendu Nandy, Andrés Muñoz-Jaramillo, & Petrus C. H. Martens; Nature 471, page 80, 03 March 2011
|
|
dh7fb
New Member
Posts: 25
|
Post by dh7fb on Apr 5, 2011 18:32:14 GMT
It would be necessary to explain the strong asymmetric behaviour of the SC23 at least during the recovery from 2003 on when declaring the "one and only solution" . We see a very strong southward orientated sunspot-area! Look www.dh7fb.de/ssnano/ssasy23.gif , I used daily data for this plot. In blue the "N-S-Index" with a simple 12 month running mean and in red the total Sunspot-area. Until the Maximum (it was in late 2001 for the sunspot-area) we don't see a strong asymmetric SS-area, from 2003 on very, very strong southward. Greetings from DH7FB |
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Apr 5, 2011 18:36:39 GMT
It would be necessary to explain the strong asymmetric behaviour of the SC23 at least during the recovery from 2003 on when declaring the "one and only solution" . We see a very strong southward orientated sunspot-area! Look www.dh7fb.de/ssnano/ssasy23.gif , I used daily data for this plot. In blue the "N-S-Index" with a simple 12 month running mean and in red the total Sunspot-area. Until the Maximum (it was in late 2001 for the sunspot-area) we don't see a strong asymmetric SS-area, from 2003 on very, very strong southward. Greetings from DH7FB such asymmetry happens often, see e.g. sidc.oma.be/html/wnosuf.html :  the Sun is a messy place. |
|
dh7fb
New Member
Posts: 25
|
Post by dh7fb on Apr 5, 2011 18:57:43 GMT
You are right of course... my plot has the same message: In the "Nandy paper" there is nothing at all written about this asymmetric behaviour and no explanation to this point... the meridional flow speed has the same amplitude in both hemispheres? The southward asymmetry of SC23 (it was observed in the paper) was the biggest in the last 130 years except SC19 (northward), both during downswing!
DH7FB
|
|
|
|
Post by Maui on Apr 5, 2011 20:18:42 GMT
From Dr. Isvalgaard's graph, it appears that southern excess at the end of cycle 23 caused the current northern excess.
I have developed a computer model which proves this. Here is the algorithm:
"You put your right foot down
You pick your left foot up."
But in my model, it gets very confusing from there on. Nevertheless, the model is illustrative because it shows there must be balance even in asymmetry, it cannot be ignored or one will fall over and that's not what it's all about.
Who am I to question the greats of solar terrestrial physics? Who are they to sell me an 8.9-year "solar cycle?" This study uses other well-defined units, such as "year, " "day," and "meters per second." If one of the parameters is off, shouldn't they all be corrected?
|
|
|
|
Post by france on Apr 6, 2011 20:36:40 GMT
Does such a graph exist for all solar cycles dr Svalgaard ? |
|
|
|
Post by Bob k6tr on Apr 6, 2011 21:04:52 GMT
Does such a graph exist for all solar cycles dr Svalgaard ? France ask SIDC (Sloar Influences Data Center) that is where the graph comes from. |
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Apr 6, 2011 22:14:41 GMT
Does such a graph exist for all solar cycles dr Svalgaard ? France ask SIDC (Sloar Influences Data Center) that is where the graph comes from. No, only back to 1874. |
|
wd7z
New Member
Posts: 41 
|
Post by wd7z on Apr 7, 2011 0:05:48 GMT
From Dr. Isvalgaard's graph, it appears that southern excess at the end of cycle 23 caused the current northern excess. I have developed a computer model which proves this. Here is the algorithm: "You put your right foot down You pick your left foot up." But in my model, it gets very confusing from there on. Nevertheless, the model is illustrative because it shows there must be balance even in asymmetry, it cannot be ignored or one will fall over and that's not what it's all about. Who am I to question the greats of solar terrestrial physics? Who are they to sell me an 8.9-year "solar cycle?" This study uses other well-defined units, such as "year, " "day," and "meters per second." If one of the parameters is off, shouldn't they all be corrected? This, it seems, is as valuable as most models of late. Problem is, it seems backwards. It should be "you put your left foot up" first. Left = North. That seems to be what the graph shows happened more often than not and is happening again. There is a question in there somewhere. You just have to figure out where it is. |
|
